Note: The degree of the larceny is
determined by the value of the property stolen. See § 53a-122 (first degree); § 53a-123 (second degree);
§ 53a-124 (third degree); § 53a-125 (fourth degree); § 53a-125a
(fifth degree); § 53a-125b (sixth degree). The dollar amounts for the
degrees of larceny were increased as of October 1, 2009. See the table in
Introduction to Larceny for the values in effect
prior to that date.

The defendant is charged [in count __]
with larceny by acquiring property lost, mislaid, or delivered by mistake in the
(first / second / third / fourth / fifth / sixth) degree. The statute defining
this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person who comes into control of
property of another that (he/she) knows to have been lost, mislaid or delivered
under a mistake as to the nature or amount of the property or the identity of
the recipient is guilty of larceny if, with purpose to deprive the owner
thereof, (he/she) fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to a
person entitled to it.

For you to find the defendant guilty
of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable
doubt:

Element 1 - Acquired property
of anotherThe first element is that the
defendant came into control of the property of another. This means that the
defendant took possession of the property or put the property in some place
where it would be subject to (his/her) will. It means asserting some dominion
or authority over the property by some action, such as moving it to some other
location, concealing it, or using it. Some overt act of control is essential.

Element 2 - KnowledgeThe second element is that the
defendant knew that the property had been lost, mislaid or delivered by
mistake. A person acts "knowingly"
with respect to conduct or circumstances when (he/she) is aware that (his/her)
conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. <See
Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.

Element 3 - Failed to take
measures to restore propertyThe third element is that the
defendant did not take reasonable measures to restore the property to the
owner. What measures are reasonable depends upon the circumstances -- the
opportunity to return the property, the identifiability of the owner, the lapse
of time, and any other factor bearing on reasonableness. A person is not
required, however, to incur any substantial expense in order to return property
to the owner.

It is specifically provided by another
statute that a person who finds and takes possession of any property of more
than $1.00 in value must report to the police within forty-eight hours that
(he/she) has found such property.1
Therefore, if you find that the defendant failed to report the finding of such
property to the police within such time, you may, but are not required to, find
that this was unreasonable.

Element 4 - IntentThe fourth element is that the
defendant intended to deprive the owner of the property. To intend to "deprive"
another of property means to intend to withhold or keep or cause it to be
withheld from another permanently, or for so long a period or under such
circumstances that the major portion of its value is lost to that person. In
other words, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
took control of the property for the purpose of keeping or using it permanently
or virtually permanently, or of disposing of the property in such a way that
there was a permanent or virtually permanent loss of the property to the owner.

A person might take control of
property that (he/she) knows is lost, mislaid, or delivered by mistake, but
would not be guilty of larceny if (he/she) had the intent to restore it to the
owner. An intention to use property temporarily would not be an intent to
deprive the owner of the property, unless such use involved the loss of a major
portion of the value of the property to the owner. An intention to dispose of
the property so as to render it unlikely that the owner will recover it would
include such actions as a sale or transfer to another person, concealment, or
alteration of the property, if such a disposition would render it unlikely that
the property would be recovered.

Element 5 - ValueThe fifth element is that the property
had a value that <insert as appropriate:>

<See
Larceny, Instruction 9.1-1, for a full explanation of this element.>

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant came into control of property,
2) (he/she) knew that the property was lost, mislaid, or delivered by mistake,
3) (he/she) did not take reasonable measures to restore the property to the
owner, 4) (he/she) intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property,
and 5) the value of the property obtained was <insert value according to
degree charged>.

If you unanimously find that the state
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of
larceny by acquiring property lost, mislaid or delivered by mistake, then you
shall find the defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you unanimously find
that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the
elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.
_______________________________________________________